Subject: Re: New Proposal for Beech Forest Logging in NZ - S
Is.
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:29:33 +1100
From: Anne Reeves < areeves@ozemail.com.au
>
Following up plea for support from NZ conservationists against
new native
forest logging in NZ (yes, we thought they had stopped doing
this!) I have
received further info via Brent Hoare originating from Kevin
Smith who some
may remember as Forest & Bird NZ person from time he attended
ACF's 1988
Conference in Sydney.
1 I suggest we have an Urgency Motion at NCC Annual Conf. to
write submission of concern;
2 I seek Nat Parks Aust. Council Exec support for brief
submission;
3 Urge other organisations, including ACF, ACIUCN, WWF to follow
up as appropriate
4 encourage individuals to write in too.
Anne Reeves,
NPA Council President and
NPA NSW V-P and Delegate to forthcoming NCC Ann Conf.
Anne Reeves.
message from a UK based list-server about the issue.
>PLEASE WRITE FOR NEW ZEALAND'S BEECH FORESTS
>
>Hi, I am Kevin Smith, conservation director of the Forest and
Bird
>Protection Society of New Zealand. We are seeking help from
>environmental activists everywhere to help us protect 130 000
ha of
>publicly owned New Zealand rainforest threatened by logging.
The
>government has been forced to undertake public consultation
on the
>logging proposals but given very little time for comment. We
are
>seeking assisstance from activists everywhere to help us
swamp the
>government with submissions ( a simple email will suffice)
calling for
>an end to the logging and protection of these ancient
rainforests.
>Please pass this message on. Thank you for your help. Feel
free to
>contact me for more information if needed.
>smithk@wn.forest-bird.org.nz
>The New Zealand Government's logging company, Timberlands
West Coast
>Ltd has unveiled an industrial scale logging scheme for the
beech
>forests of the West Coast of the South Island. The public and
>scientists have only been given until Friday 6 1998 to
comment. Lots
>of e-mails and submissions are needed to convince Government
Ministers
>that the beech forests have more value standing tall as
natural
>forest, than as beech timber for which Timberlands has yet to
create a
>market. Please help New Zealand conservationists protect
these
>forests.
>
>E-mail a submission to
> donaghiec@maf.govt.nz
>Snail mail to
>"Public Comment, West Coast Beech Management
Plans", c/o Ministry of
>Agriculture and Forestry (MAF), PO Box 2526, Wellington, New
Zealand
>or fax 00 64 4 498 9898. Remember to include your name and
postal
>address. SUBMISSIONS CLOSE AT 4.00 PM FRIDAY 6 NOVEMBER 1998
>
>Key points for submissions
>Call on the New Zealand Government to :
>. implement the Biodiversity Convention, stop the proposed
beech
>scheme and protect West Coast native beech and rimu forests.
>
>. wind up its logging company, Timberlands and use the money
this
>releases to help communities on the West Coast improve their
>environmental infrastructure (eg upgrade sewerage systems and
>landfills) and create sustainable jobs through eco tourism
and
>adventure tourism..
>
>Why the beech scheme is an ecological and economic nonsense
>1. Timberlands "manages" 132,000 ha of indigenous
forest on the
>spectacular and scenic West Coast of the South Island. This
is one of
>only two areas of public land where indigenous forest logging
>continues.
>
>2. The beech scheme will affect nearly 1000 square kilometres
(98,000
>ha) of beech (Nothofagus spp) and beech/ podocarp forest.
Much of it
>is pristine, old growth forest with the remainder strongly
>regenerating after logging up to 80 years ago. The Department
of
>Conservation has identified 92 % of the forests which
Timberlands
>controls as having high or medium conservation values. Areas
such as
>the 13,000 ha Maruia forests provide outstanding wildlife
habitat for
>species threatened with extinction such as kaka (a forest
parrot),
>bats, geckos, blue duck (only found in swift, wild rivers)
parakeets
>and several native fish species which have disappeared
elsewhere in
>New Zealand.
>
>3. The "beech/ rimu scheme would more than triple the
current rate of
>native forest logging on the West Coast and re-invigorate an
industry
>that was winding down. It involves logging more than 230,000
beech
>trees and an unknown number of rimu trees each year.
>
>4. There is no economic, social or other need to log old
growth
>indigenous forest. New Zealand has ample plantation forests
to meet
>its timber needs. The same volume of timber (80,000 cubic
metres)
>which Timberlands seeks to produce annually from 98,000 ha of
beech
>forest could be provided by less than 11,500 ha of plantation
pine.
>With the beech scheme NZ loses the opportunity to provide
much needed
>world leadership on forest conservation.
>
>5. Instead of clear-cutting, loggers will pock-mark the
forests with
>small clearings of between one and 10 trees in a futile
attempt to
>"mimic nature". They return to each operational
area every 15 years.
>There has been no research on the impacts on forest
structure,
>ecosystem processes, species diversity and abundance, of
logging which
>repeatedly picks away at the forest in this way. The beech
plans are
>based on logging models prepared for tropical forests, with
little
>actual NZ data about growth and mortality rates for beech.
>
>6. Less than 15% of New Zealand s lowland forest remains, and
less
>than 50 % of what remains on the West Coast is protected.
Lowland
>forests are a high ecological priority because of their
greater
>abundance and diversity of plants and wildlife than montane
forest
>Most of the Timberlands' beech and beech/rimu forests are
lowland
>forest below 700 metres.
>
>7. A major 1997 report on the "State of New Zealand's
Environment"
>concluded that biodiversity decline is New Zealand s most
pervasive
>environmental issue , and that two of the major pressures on
>indigenous biodiversity are insufficient habitat in lowland
areas and
>the declining quality of many of the remaining land and
freshwater
>habitats. The logging will degrade important lowland habitat.
>
>8. Natural forests will be progressively turned into beech
timber
>plantations. For every log taken to the sawmill, the plans
allow
>another two trees to be felled and left to rot in the forest
as part
>of an improvement felling regime to try and increase future
timber
>recovery. Natural forests will also be "thinned" to
increase future
>timber yields.
>
>9. Predation and competition from introduced pests (such as
stoats,
>ferrets, rats, deer, pigs, and possums) are major problems
for forest
>health and native wildlife, especially birds and
invertebrates. There
>is no science to prove Timberlands' claims that predator
control can
>balance out logging's impacts on habitat values and wildlife.
The
>company's predator control plans are minimal and vague.
>
>10. Less than 40 jobs depend directly on native forest
logging on the
>West Coast. Timberlands has no definite markets for beech and
little
>processing is likely to be done there. The scheme is proposed
to
>provide a cash-flow to prop up a poorly performing Government
company.
>It provides scant benefits to taxpayers or the public because
>Timberlands pays a negligible stumpage or royalty and little
income
>tax.
>
>11. If the beech scheme were stopped, Timberlands wound up
and the
>cutting rights to its exotic plantation forests sold, this
would
>release funds which could be used to benefit the West Coast
people in
>a "Conservation and Communities" package. Potential
initiatives
>include funding assistance for tourism promotion, upgrading
of tracks,
>visitor centres, and tourist facilities, long overdue
upgrades to
>sub-standard sewerage systems and to local landfills.
>
>For more information visit Forest and Bird's web site at http://www.forest-bird.org.nz
>
>
>Brent Hoare & Adrienne Murphy
>90 Camp St
>Katoomba, Blue Mountains, NSW 2780
>Australia
>(+61)-(0)2-4782-6883
> burramys@hermes.net.au